Skip to content

Digby's Hullabaloo Posts

Coverup, Inc.

Published by Tom Sullivan on February 28, 2026

A wholly owned subsidiary of the Trump Organization

Heather Cox Richardson, night owl, posted a lengthy summary very early this morning of a CBS report I missed entirely from Monday night. A heavily redacted, 69-page document released with the Epstein files reveals that, along with the sex trafficking investigation, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) began another investigation of Jeffrey Epstein and fourteen others in 2010. Code named “Chain Reaction,” this investigation focused on drug trafficking, prostitution, and money laundering.

Hovering in the background of the lurid child sex trafficking stories is the question of how Epstein made the money behind his private island, private jet, and multiple properties. The DEA’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) wanted to know too. The special unit was following the money Epstein stashed in Switzerland, France, the Cayman Islands and New York. Until Pam Bondi’s DOJ shut down the unit.

Under Analytical Findings, the 2015 report states, “DEA reporting indicates the above individuals are involved in illegitimate wire transfers which are tied to illicit drug and/or prostitution activities occurring in the U.S. Virgin Islands and New York City.”

HCR adds (I’m adding her links):

Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top-ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, described OCDETF as “a premier task force set up to identify, disrupt and dismantle major organized crime and drug trafficking operations.” It “worked with partners across federal agencies to conduct sophisticated investigations into transnational organized crime and money laundering. OCDETF frequently targeted dangerous drug cartels , the Russian mafia and violent gangs moving fentanyl and weapons.” The Trump administration dismantled OCDETF.

[…]

Wyden has been investigating the finances behind Epstein’s criminal sex trafficking organization. His investigation has turned up the information that JPMorgan Chase neglected to report more than $4 billion in suspicious financial transactions linked to Epstein. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has refused to produce the records to the Senate Finance Committee, and in September, Wyden introduced the Produce Epstein Treasury Records Act (PETRA) to get access to them. In November, Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, but it did not cover Treasury financial records.

“The basic question here is whether a bunch of rich pedophiles and Epstein accomplices are going to face any consequences for their crimes,” Wyden said, “and Scott Bessent is doing his best to make sure they won’t. My head just about exploded when I heard Bessent say it wasn’t his department’s job to investigate these Epstein bank records…. From the beginning, my view has been that following the money is the key to identifying Epstein’s clients as well as the henchmen and banks that enabled his sex trafficking network. It’s past time for Bessent to quit running interference for pedophiles and give us the Epstein files he’s sitting on.”

When the CBS News reporters broke the story about the DEA investigation, Wyden said: “It appears Epstein was involved in criminal activity that went way beyond pedophilia and sex trafficking, which makes it even more outrageous that [Attorney General] Pam Bondi is sitting on several million unreleased files.”

CBS followed up on Thursday with more on the DEA investigation, quoting a letter Wyden sent to DEA Administrator Terrance C. Cole:

“The fact that Epstein was under investigation by the DOJ’s OCDETF task force suggests that there was ample evidence indicating that Epstein was engaged in heavy drug trafficking and prostitution as part of cross-border criminal conspiracy,” Wyden writes. “This is incredibly disturbing and raises serious questions as to how this investigation by the DEA was handled.”

Not to mention that the names of those under investigation were blacked out in violation of provisions of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Wyden wrote:

Since Epstein and his 14 co-conspirators were never charged by the DOJ for drug trafficking or financial crimes, I am concerned that the DEA and DOJ during the first Trump Administration moved to terminate this investigation in order to protect pedophiles. I am also concerned that the excessive redactions of this memorandum for operation “Chain Reaction” go well beyond the intent of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which allows for redactions to protect the identity of victims, not members of a criminal sex trafficking organization. Since this memorandum designated as “sensitive but unclassified” there is no reason to withhold an unredacted version of this document from the U.S. Congress.

Au contraire, Wyden implies in subtext, the Trump administration must think there is. Follow the money.

Wyden asks Cole to provide by March 16 an unredacted copy of the OCDETF report and for answers to what “illicit drug activities” Epstein and others were engaged in. “Did the OCDETF or any other DOJ component recommend that Epstein and/or any of his 14 co-conspirators be charged with drug trafficking, money laundering or any other federal crimes that did not include sex or human trafficking?” Also, why were there never any drug trafficking or money laundering charges filed against any in the group? And what was the legal basis for redacting their names?

Stay tuned for more stonewalling.

Friday Night Soother

Published by digby on February 27, 2026

The internet sensation: Punch!

A young, abandoned monkey named Punch went viral this month after he was filmed clinging to the stuffed toy that he had been given as a “surrogate mother.” Now, Punch is gradually building up his social skills. He’s been spotted climbing on another monkey’s back, and according to the Ichikawa Zoo and local media he has been embraced by an older monkey, a sign that he is on his way to social acceptance.

He is everywhere!

Oh Melania

Published by digby on February 27, 2026
Melania photographed on Trump’s plane

If they’re calling First Ladies to testify about Epstein…

For much of the 1990s, Antoine Verglas was one of fashion’s most sought-after photographers, celebrated for his raw, natural-light portraits of supermodels including Cindy Crawford, Claudia Schiffer, Tyra Banks, Gisele Bündchen, Naomi Campbell, and Stephanie Seymour. His work appeared in Elle, Vogue, GQ, Esquire, Maxim, and Sports Illustrated, helping define the era’s sensual, off-duty aesthetic.

Verglas also played a central role in launching Melania Trump’s modeling career after she arrived in the United States from Slovenia, photographing her roughly a dozen times—including capturing her most iconic nude images, among them the British GQ spread shot aboard Donald Trump’s private plane.

What has received far less scrutiny is how Verglas remained embedded in Jeffrey Epstein’s world—long after Epstein’s 2008 conviction for solicitation of prostitution and solicitation of prostitution of a minor and his registration as a sex offender.

Verglas reveals just one degree of separation between Epstein and Melania and offers a window into the elite modeling ecosystem Epstein repeatedly exploited, where introductions became access points, visas became leverage, and young women moved through a world he had already learned how to control.

There really aren’t any degrees of separation between Epstein and Melania. She’s pictured with him dozens of times. They clearly knew each other. And she was close with their mutual friend:

Verglas didn’t just photograph Melania—he helped create the imagery that propelled her career: the 2000 Sports Illustrated Swimsuit shoot with an inflatable orca; Maximum Golf, where she reclines in a bathtub covered in golf balls. Verglas has said he heard about Melania from Paolo Zampolli, a longtime associate of both Epstein’s and Trump’s who was running ID Models in 1999, shortly before Melania began seeking to secure her permanent residency in the US and at the height of Epstein’s sex-trafficking operation. Verglas said he did not know Epstein at the time.

According to The Washington Post, Melania ultimately obtained an EB-1 “Einstein visa,” reserved for individuals with extraordinary ability. Verglas photographed her again in 2011 for Haute Living.

Just as a reminder, Donald Trump also had a “modeling agency” during that period. (This story in The Guardian tells the sordid tale. ) Here he is with some of his models. To coin a phrase, “they’re on the younger side.”

Whiskey Pete’s Latest Atrocity

Published by digby on February 27, 2026


Erin In The Morning, an excellent Substack about trans issues had this today:

Nine years ago, the Boy Scouts of America announced that it would begin accepting transgender youth into the program. In 2018, it opened its doors to girls, and in 2024, it rebranded as Scouting America. Transgender scouts were welcomed to participate alongside peers matching their gender identity, and the organization built out initiatives to be inclusive to people of all identities and creeds. That all came to a crashing halt today, when Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced that the organization would be dropping all diversity initiatives, putting more emphasis on faith, and forcibly outing and segregating transgender scouts from their peers—forcing them to only be acknowledged by their assigned sex at birth and segregating them from peers of their gender.

“After 2012, however, the Boy Scouts lost their way and a once great organization became gravely wounded. Diversity, equity, and inclusion, DEI, crept in. The name was changed to Scouting America. Girls were accepted. The focus on God as the ruler of the universe was watered down to include openness to humanism and earth-centered pagan religions… They even welcomed the destructive myth of gender fluidity and transgenderism to infiltrate their membership,” Hegseth said in a video posted to Twitter.

He then announced major changes at the organization, including new anti-transgender policies. “Scouting America has agreed to comply immediately with the provisions of executive order 14173. This includes reviewing and replacing politicized, divisive, and discriminatory language throughout the organization, programs, and all publications. No more DEI. Zero,” Hegseth said. “The Citizen in Society merit badge that encouraged scouts to explore diversity, equity, inclusion, and identity… that badge has been discontinued. Third, Scouting America will modify its policy to make clear that membership will be based solely on biological sex at birth and not gender identity. That means that the application, any application, will have only two sex designations, male and female, and the application must match the applicant’s birth certificate. Scouting will also make clear that biological boys and girls will not be allowed to occupy or share intimate spaces together, toilets, showers, tents, anywhere like that.”

He ended by saying that he wanted them to ban girls in the organization as well so that they will go back to turning boys into men.

I don’t know why Scouts are any of Hegseth’s business in the first place. Who the fuck does he think he is? And why in the world are they capitulating to him in a process that is going to hurt vulnerable, young kids? If I had a child of scouting age I would be forced to conclude that they are mean, nasty people and I wouldn’t want my kids involved with them.

I hope that everyone realizes that we are living through a period of rank, appalling bigotry that it will go down in history as one of the cruelest assaults on a small minority of powerless human beings who are hurting absolutely no one. It is utterly appalling.

Goodbye To The Tiffany Network

Published by digby on February 27, 2026

This is a letter from a long time CBS producer:

“We’ve been told to aim our reporting at a particular part of the political spectrum. Honestly, I don’t know how to do that.”

Says it all.

Dear Leader Watch

Published by digby on February 27, 2026

BARTIROMO: Patriotism is spreading to on air broadcasts. Mr Chairman, you announced your Pledge America Campaign, encouraging broadcasters to air more pro-America content, such as starting each day with the Star Spangled Banner or Pledge of Allegiance. Tell us more

FCC CHAIR BRENDAN CARR: We’re in the midst of a great revival. President Trump is truly the political colossus of our time

He has a 36% approval rating and is loathed by virtually everyone in the world.

Yes he a colossus. A colossal abomination.

The Golden Age

Published by digby on February 27, 2026

This is why Trump’s bleating is falling on deaf ears:

Health care, new cars and new homes feel unaffordable to most Americans, a Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll shows.

Most Americans say that they can afford basic necessities like their current housing costs, groceries, utilities and gasoline. But large numbers across income levels also say larger expenses and the cost of things associated with an enjoyable life — including taking a weeklong vacation — are out of reach. Overall, 53 percent of adults say they have just enough money to maintain their standard of living, nearly identical to a year ago, while roughly half, or more, say that discretionary spending on going out to dinner, vacations and new cars is unaffordable.

The American dream is on life support.

Meanwhile Trump is spending billions on a ridiculous game of chicken with Iran that nobody understands and building monuments to himself.

Talk about not reading the room…

News Flash: Americans Are Unhappy

Published by Tom Sullivan on February 27, 2026

Time to get tough, Democrats

Elliot Morris is wrapping up a series of posts on his latest Strength In Numbers/Verasight poll:

Americans are unhappy with the way things are going in the country, and don’t feel particularly well represented by either major political party. In our new February  Strength In Numbers/Verasight poll, 53% of U.S. adults say the Democratic Party is out of touch with the concerns of most Americans. An identical percentage — 53% — say the same about Republicans.

The problem, Morris says, is that out-of-touchness is not the kind conventional wisdom suggests:

Whether a party is “in touch” or “out of touch,” we found, is a product of more than just ideological perceptions. In our survey, U.S. adults call Democrats weak (48%),  ineffective (47%), and out of touch — but also empathetic (54%) and principled (49%). They call Republicans extreme (60%), elitist (57%), and cruel (51%). Both parties have brand problems. But the kind of problem is fundamentally different from what most people are assuming — and that difference matters enormously for 2026.

They tested for this by asking respondents for an assessment of 10 adjectives. You can survey the results in the chart above.

Since 45 percent of Americans now identify as independents, I’m obsessed with turning out more friendlies. Morris addresses that:

Democrats’ brand among independents differs from their brand among all adults in one hugely important way: the “extreme” label fades significantly. Just 35% of independents call Democrats extreme, versus 42% of all adults. That 7-point drop suggests the people telling pollsters Democrats are “too extreme” are disproportionately Republicans. Among actual swing voters, “extreme” isn’t really a Democratic problem. The GOP, on the other hand, has a big problem with perceived extremism.

What is a Democratic problem is that 45% of independents say Democrats are weak, and 44% say ineffective — nearly identical to the national numbers. Contra the extremism drop-off, these traits aren’t sourced to partisan talking points. Just 23% of independents call Democrats tough, the second-lowest rating either party gets on any trait — surpassed only by the GOP’s 22% on empathy among independents.

Independents “see two flawed parties — one that’s full of cruel, elitist extremists, and one that’s weak and ineffective.” Conventional wisdom post-2024 suggests that Democrats moderate for 2026 and 2028, but survey data suggests that that “gets the problem exactly backwards.”

Morris gets into a wonky statistical analysis of whether Democrats moderating or looking stronger gets them more electoral bang for the buck. But the two are not unrelated. It turns out that improving the party’s perception of strength is a better bet for winning a vote versus its extremeness score. Improving the party’s perception as strong is also a better bet than a perception that it is moderating. But good luck with that.

But good luck with that. It will take sustained effort. Morris has a few modest proposals:

What are some things they could do? First, they should treat any newsworthy confrontation with the Trump administration as a campaign opportunity, rather than a risk. Democrats may need to rethink their strategy in and out of Congress to orient around toughness. Maybe that means holding up nominees, forcing procedural votes, shutting down the government, or even showing up at protests. Democratic leaders should adopt the mindset of doing whatever it takes to shift perceptions. The strategy of issuing carefully worded statements or rolling over on funding challenges is a big reason the party finds itself where it does today.

The root of this Democratic Party problem is cultural. As a friend suggests, Democrats are cowed as much by their own supporters as by the right. Step out of line, say the wrong thing using the wrong terminology, and you’re Saint Sebastian pierced by your own allies’ arrows. “But what will Republicans say” is another cringe from some party elders who flinch like abused spouses. Not a good look. I just saw the Dropkick Murphys on Sunday. Their loud, in-your-face advocacy for working people was bracing. Maybe try that.

I’m a field guy. I see a party of policy liberals and campaign conservatives. Party leaders are still operating in the 20th century. I hear it in person from state-level candidates. Their idea of taking their game to the next level is doing the same thing they’ve always done, the way they’ve always done it, just more of it. There is no outside-the-box thinking and no risk-taking even when same old, same old isn’t working. They don’t experiment or innovate. They’ll update their software but not rethink their strategy. They’re in a groove so deep that they can’t see over the top of it. Few recognize it. 

Democrats cannot win with registered Democrats alone. Except the lists they assemble for turning out independents are consistently too narrow. Plus, their committed volunteers, God bless ’em, want to knock every door like Jehovah’s Witnesses for Democrats. That’s not exactly the right approach with independents that give both major parties the side-eye even if they lean left. Democrats don’t just need broader targeting. They need a strategy that’s not one-size-fits-all. If they expect to encourage friendly independents to vote, the doorstep pitch isn’t about asking independents to vote for Democrats. That’s perhaps too much of an ask. In areas where independents lean blue but vote too little, the challenge is getting them to vote at all. The ask should be to vote as an exercise of their own power over their futures. But that would require a nimbleness and flexibility most campaigns and local committees cannot muster.

Also, half the independents are under 45.

Do Democrats want to win badly enough to try something new?

The Watchers

Published by Tom Sullivan on February 27, 2026

Are watching you

https://immpolicytracking.org/policies/reported-ice-accessing-flock-automated-license-plate-reader-cameras-via-local-law-enforcement/

Flock cameras came up last night over dinner with nonpolitical friends, so one assumes it’s a thing. Americans are becoming spooked by the spread of surveillance of the sort seen in Minority Report (2002) and Enemy of the State (1998).

The New Republic subhead reads: “From New York to Alabama to Arizona, everyday people are mounting a local resistance to the company’s mass surveillance. And sometimes, they take matters into their own hands.” People are taking to destroying Flock cameras. Someone a few weeks a go handed me the laminated flyer above that they’d pulled off a pole in West Asheville.

TNR explains:

All told, Flock represents a staggeringly powerful—and profitable—mass surveillance system. Its ALPRs are used by over 1,000 businesses and roughly one-third of 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the United States, according to Holly Beilin, Flock’s senior director of communications. While Beilin wouldn’t provide the number of active Flock cameras in the U.S., the ACLU estimates there to be 90,000. Flock used ALPRs, along with other products like drones and gunshot detectors, to generate $285 million in revenue in 2024. Venture capital titans Andreessen Horowitz recently valued the company at $7.5 billion.

But growing in concert with Flock is an organized resistance movement which has notched more than a few wins. Its nexus is DeFlock.me, which hosts a crowdsourced map of ALPRs and warns readers that the cameras are “a serious risk to your privacy and civil liberties.” The website lists 15 local anti-Flock groups around the country, though its creator, Will Freeman, estimates there to be 30 in total. While many of these groups use “DeFlock” in their name, Freeman stressed that all operate independently of his site.

Yeah, it’s a thing.

Even if Flock’s cameras and tracking network do help solve some crimes, critics say it’s not worth the cost to our privacy—not to mention people’s Fourth Amendment rights. Police have been caught illegally using Flock data to locate a woman seeking abortion services, stalk and harass people, monitor protests, and aid ICE. “At minimum, this dragnet surveillance means warrantless tracking of everyone on the road,” the ACLU warned last year. “At worst, it means a digital police state wherein law enforcement officials … can track protesters, political opponents, immigrants, patients, and others not suspected of any crime and use the information to hurt them.” (Dan Haley, chief legal officer at Flock, responded that “Flock is used … millions of times a year, and the incidences of abuse are few and far between.” He added that all evidence of misuse is recorded in Flock’s software.)

That’s comforting, right?

ICYMI, 404 Media had this take on the “find your puppy” ad Ring sponsored during the Super Bowl:

At Sunday’s Super Bowl, Ring advertised “Search Party,” a cute, horrifyingly dystopian feature nominally designed to turn all of the Ring cameras in a neighborhood into a dragnet that uses AI to look for a lost dog: “One post of a dog’s photo in the Ring app starts outdoor cameras looking for a match,” Ring founder Jamie Siminoff said in the Super Bowl commercial. “Search Party from Ring uses AI to help families find lost dogs.” Onscreen, an AI-powered box forms around a missing dog: “Milo Match,” it says. “Since launch, more than a dog a day has been reunited with their family. Be a hero in your neighborhood with Search Party. Available to everyone for free right now.”

It does not take an imagination of any sort to envision this being tweaked to work against suspected criminals, undocumented immigrants, or others deemed ‘suspicious’ by people in the neighborhood. Many of these use cases are how Ring has been used by people on its dystopian “Neighbors” app for years. Ring rose to prominence as a piece of package theft prevention tech owned by Amazon and by forming partnerships with local police around the country, asking them to shill their doorbell cameras to people in their neighborhoods in return for a system that allowed police to request footage from individual users without a warrant. 

Chris Gilliard, a privacy expert and author of the upcoming book Luxury Surveillance, told 404 Media these features and its Super Bowl ad are “a clumsy attempt by Ring to put a cuddly face on a rather dystopian reality: widespread networked surveillance by a company that has cozy relationships with law enforcement and other equally invasive surveillance companies.”

Like Flock, maybe? Sleep tight.

The “Good Ones”

Published by digby on February 26, 2026

We’re opening the doors! — to the racist, white South Africans.

It’s clear why Trump is doing this and he might as well be David Duke:

The U.S. aims to process 4,500 refugee applications from white South Africans per month, far above President Donald Trump’s stated refugee program cap, and is installing trailers on embassy property in Pretoria to support the effort, a U.S. contracting document said.

The new target, contained in a previously unreported document from the U.S. State Department dated January 27, signals a push to ramp up admissions from South Africa, while refugee applications from other areas have been severely curtailed.

It’s not like we don’t have enough homegrown racists already, I guess we have to bring in some more.

I think it’s the obviousness of it that’s so disheartening. This is really just trolling. And he knows that nothing will be done about it. He’s just telling over half the people in this country to go fuck themselves.

Three more years of this… oy vey.